This story typifies the problem. That the story is even printed as if normal and serious gives us an indicattion of the depths of the decline.
The story concerns the new head of the campaigning group Stonewall. Stonewall, originally set up to defend and extend the rights of gay people has wholeheartedly embraced the “trans movement”. (There are of course gay people who do not support “trans rights” unequivocally). To understand the story readers also need to know that the author of the Harry Potter books, J. K. Rowling is very active, especially on social media. arguing against certain aspects of trans ideology. Rowling is one of those who make the “controversial” statement (!!!!!!) that “a woman is a woman”.
The new head of Stonewall was asked in an interview in the Guardian what she thought about J. K. Rowling. She replied:
I have a huge respect for JK Rowling. I’ve had the pleasure of meeting her before and I think her story and how she came to be this prolific, incredible children’s writer in this city as a single mum writing in a cafe is phenomenal and an inspiration…
I understand that [that some “trans people” find Rowling’s comments “dehumanising”], and I’ve also heard JK Rowling and other people who hold a different position on these issues to me describe with a similar rawness how they’ve experienced being opposed for their views. And I just think, you know, the days of these culture wars, about sitting in polar extremes from each other, should be behind us now….
…generosity of spirit, a willingness to get into the grey area to talk about these things calmly
Well, here we are. A mature person, willing to recocognise that an opponent in a debate is still someone with their own achievements, and worthy of respect for those, even if you disagree with them on certain points. Indeed, this atttitude, “I disagree with your opinion but I can still respect you as a person” is just the attitude needed to sustain a tolerant and liberal society.
How did this go down with the “trans community” and their advocates? It seems, guess what, that the incomming chair of Stonewall, has been denounced. She has been forced to issue the standard grovelling apology:
In my first interview as incoming chair of Stonewall, I was asked a question about JK Rowling. In answering, I should have been absolutely unequivocal that I would never condone behaviour from anyone that seeks to or causes harm to anyone in our community. That is a red line for me and should be for all of us. I understand the interview has caused worry, anger and upset and I am truly sorry about that
In other words. She has been denounced for showing generosity of spirit and respect towards J. K. Rowling. She is, of course, expected to hate J. K. Rowlingand designate her as an awful person. The “trans moverment” certainly practices the “dehumanisation” which they accuse others of to a letter.
Non-binary people and prostate glands
While on this topic, here is another example of how far this weird and disturbing ideology has permeated. This is on a national level NGO but linked to the NHS (public health service), page about prostate cancer:
The following people have a prostate:
- men
- trans women*
- non-binary people who were registered male at birth**
- some intersex people.***
* A trans woman is someone who was registered male at birth and identifies as a woman. Trans women can develop prostate problems, even if they have taken hormones, or if they have had genital reconstructive surgery. The prostate is not usually removed during this surgery.
** A non-binary person does not identify as a man or a woman.
*** An intersex person may have both male and female sexual characteristics and so might have a prostate. [1]
Intersex is a valid biological condition so it is not unreasonable to mention that, (even though the proporption of people affected will be very small – and they will already to know that they are a ‘special case’). But, the other points are unusual. A “trans-woman” appears to mean a male person who thinks of themselves as female or who may be undergoing surgery to remove some of their male bits and add on a few female ones. A “non-binary” person seems to be, in this conext, a male person who declines to say that they are a male or female. Basically, prostate problems occur in biological males, (and those intersex people with this in their profile). What is odd, is the way that these cultural choices, for want of a better word, are confused with ontological, biologically-based, realities and categories. I can’t believe this is medically helpful – even if we use the wider sense of “medically helpful” to encompass subjective factors and not purely biological ones. A prostate gland is a physical reality. Men, biological men, have prostate glands, regardless of what is going on in their heads! So, why not just say that? This is an example of this pandering to this fringe ideology, that goes to such an extent that it even permeates critical medical advice. It is extremly irreponsible. But – par for the course in government funded/linked organisations. For some reason.
Notes